http://ijhe.sciedupress.com International Journal of Higher Education Vol. 9, No.

1; 2020

Implementation of Project-Based Learning (PjBL) Assisted by

E-Learning through Lesson Study Activities to Improve the Quality of
Learning in Physics Learning Planning Courses
Sri Wahyu Widyaningsih1 & Irfan Yusuf1
1
Department of Physics Education, University of Papua, Indonesia
Correspondence: Irfan Yusuf, Department of Physics Education, University of Papua, Manokwari 98314 West Papua,
Indonesia. E-mail: i.yusuf@unipa.ac.id

Received: October 4, 2019 Accepted: November 12, 2019 Online Published: November 13, 2019
doi:10.5430/ijhe.v9n1p60 URL: https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v9n1p60

Abstract
This study aims to improve the quality of learning in physics learning planning courses through the implementation
of Project-Based Learning (PjBL) assisted by E-Learning through Lesson Study activities. This was qualitative
research through the stages of Lesson Study activities. Subjects in this study were the 5th-semester students who
program 11 physics learning planning subjects in the 2018-2019 academic year in the Department of Physics
Education, University of Papua. The research data were obtained through the learning outcomes of student tests. The
instrument was given after the submission of each topic of study, observation sheet of student activities, interview
guidelines, documentation in the form of video recordings during open class implementation, and student response
questionnaire. Data were analyzed through Rasch modeling with the help of the Winstep application to analyze
student responses after learning. Lesson Study activities consist of three phases of activities, namely Plan, Do, and
See. In the Planning stage, discussions with the team of lecturers were held to develop the Chapter Design and
Lesson Plan. In the Do stage, the model lecturer was based on the tools that have been prepared. In the See stage, the
reflection was carried to find out weaknesses and strengths during learning, which was then followed up on further
learning. The results showed that student-learning outcomes increased student responses to good learning, and the
learning atmosphere seemed very fun. Therefore, it could be concluded that the implementation of PjBL assisted
E-Learning through Lesson Study activities can improve the quality of learning in physics learning planning
subjects.
Keywords: e-learning, learning outcomes, lesson study, PjBL
1. Introduction
All levels of education, including universities, need to apply innovative learning to develop the quality of learning.
Students need to be provided with a good understanding before they enter the world of work (Karyadi, Sinon, Yusuf,
& Widyaningsih, 2018). Especially for prospective teacher students who will teach at the school. Every subject needs
to be well understood by students. Students in the Department of Physics Education, University of Papua, have to
enroll in a physics learning planning course. The course is one of the subjects that is very important to equip students
with insight regarding developing learning tools before they teach. The materials are currently delivered through the
lecturing method, where lecturer directly presents the subject matter without involving the student's activities to find
and find the solution to the problem itself. Student learning outcomes are also lacking. This is due to their limited
ability to develop their knowledge from lecturers (Widyaningsih & Yusuf, 2018).
Lecturers can use information and communication technology as a source of learning (Kurniawan, Mujasam, Yusuf,
& Widyaningsih, 2019; Skultety, Gonzalez, & Vargas, 2017). Although information and communication technology
media can be applied in learning, it does not mean that the media replace the lecturer (Yusuf & Widyaningsih, 2019).
However, the role of the lecturer's shifts from learning resources to facilitators, meaning that lecturers must be able to
facilitate students to practice critical thinking, collaborate, and communicate through the information and
communication technology media (Cochrane, Redmond, & Corrin, 2018; Yusuf & Subaer, 2013). In learning
interactions, students do not always have to be trained; they can search, find, solve problems and train themselves.
The ability of each student is also different; some students have high abilities so that they can search, find and
develop themselves. However, some students still need assistance to understand the subject matter.

Published by Sciedu Press 60 ISSN 1927-6044 E-ISSN 1927-6052

http://ijhe.sciedupress.com International Journal of Higher Education Vol. 9, No. 1; 2020

A model of learning that can improve student learning outcomes is Project-Based Learning (PjBL) with e-learning
integration. PjBL is learning that is designed for complex problems, in which students conduct investigations to
understand it, emphasizing learning with long-standing activities, the tasks given to students are multidisciplinary
and product-oriented (Barron et al., 1998; Ba & Beyhan, 2010). The use of e-learning in PjBL is intended to provide
learning facilities for students because each material and assignment can be accessed online whenever and wherever
they are (Heo, Lim, & Kim, 2010; Koh, Herring, & Hew, 2010). The e-learning program used in this lecture is the
Google Classroom program. Google Classroom provides various facilities such as online discussions, posting lecture
material, and assigning online assignments to students (Alverson, Schwartz, Libraries, & 2018, 2019; Heggart, Yoo,
& Heggart, 2018). To improve the effectiveness of learning, in this study, PjBL learning is assisted by e-learning
through application of lesson study activities. The lesson study activities involve model lecturers and observers to
obtain reflections in the form of suggestions and criticisms that can be used as a consideration for the implementation
of learning activities (Skultety et al., 2017). Lesson study is a means for teachers to collaborate in finding solutions
and designing innovative and learner-centered learning (Sarimanah, 2018). Therefore, it is hoped that the
implementation of PjBL with the help of e-learning through lesson study activities can improve the quality of
learning.
2. Method
This was a qualitative research through the stages of lesson study activities. The lesson study activities in this study
were carried out in three stages of activities namely Plan, Do, and See (C. Fernandez & Yoshida, 2004). In the Plan
stage, discussions with the team of lecturers were held to develop chapter design and lesson plans. In the Do stage,
the model lecturer based on the tools that have been prepared does learning. In the See stage, the reflection was
carried out to find out weaknesses and strengths during learning, which is then followed up on further learning. The
meeting was held for four times. At each meeting, lesson study activities were conducted to obtain information
regarding the learning atmosphere.
Subjects in this study were the 5th-semester students who program 11 Physics Learning Planning Subjects in the
2018-2019 academic year. Research data were assessment of student learning outcomes obtained through project
assignments given in each meeting. Project tasks undertaken by students collected online through the Google
Classroom application. Assessment of student learning outcomes was carried out online through the Google
Classroom application — category analysis of student learning outcomes as in Table I (Riduwan, 2011).
Table 1. Assessment category of student learning outcomes
Interval class Category
81-100 Very good
61-80 Good
41-60 Medium
21-40 Less
<21 Very less
In the implementation of classroom learning, student activities were observed through observation sheets filled by
observers. Other research data were also obtained through documentation of activities in the form of video
recordings during the implementation of the open class. To obtain student responses during learning, a student
response questionnaire can be provided online through the Google Classroom application. The results of the
assessment of student responses were analyzed through Rasch modeling with the help of the Ministep application.
3. Results and Discussion
This research activity was carried out four times the lesson study activities. The model lecturer carries out learning
activities and observed by observers. The details of the lesson study activities can be seen in Table 2.

Published by Sciedu Press 61 ISSN 1927-6044 E-ISSN 1927-6052

http://ijhe.sciedupress.com International Journal of Higher Education Vol. 9, No. 1; 2020

Table 2. Details of lesson study activities

Model Implementation Time
Lesson to Subject matter Observer
Lecturer Plan Do and See
1 KKM analysis Widya Halima, Nurul, Friday, August 31, 2018 Monday, September 3,
Irfan 2018
2 Effective Week Widya Halima, Nurul, Friday, August 7, 2018 Monday, September 10,
Analysis Irfan 2018
3 Annual Program Widya Halima, Nurul, Friday, August 14, 2018 Monday, September 17,
Analysis Irfan 2018
4 Semester Program Widya Halima, Adonia, Friday, August 21, 2018 Monday, September 24,
Analysis Irfan 2018
The implementation of learning is carried out through PjBL learning stages. In general, PjBL has steps or guides
called planning, creating, and processing (Genc, 2015). PjBL is comprehensive learning that includes students
conducting collaborative investigations. PjBL helps students in learning through assigned tasks (Widyaningsih &
Yusuf, 2018). At each meeting, lesson study activities were conducted to improve the quality of learning.
3.1 Lesson 1
3.1.1 Plan Phase
At the first meeting, the material taught was about determining the value of the Minimum Completeness Criteria
(KKM). During the Plan phase, discussions were held with a team of lecturers of Physics Education to develop
Chapter Design and Lesson Plan. Lecturers prepare presentation media in the form of powerpoint slides, examples of
KKM analysis, and KKM analysis worksheets using excel programs.
3.1.2 Do Phase
At the beginning of the lecture, the model lecturer gave a general description of the material and provided motivation
and apperception about the material analyzing the KKM. Figure 1 shows the learning atmosphere when the model
lecturer presents introductory material on KKM analysis.

Figure 1. The lecturer gives an introduction to the KKM analysis

Model lecturers provide various problems related to KKM analysis. Students were required to be able to solve these
problems. Students were divided into eight groups, each consisting of 2-3 people. Each group was given an example
of KKM analysis. Then the lecturer asked several groups to present the results of the group discussion. Through this
stage, students have understood how to analyze KKM to obtain KKM subjects. Then the lecturer gives the task of
analyzing the KKM to practice the knowledge they have acquired. Tasks that were carried out and developed by each
student were collected the following week through each student's account on Google Classroom. The Google
Classroom application is supported by Gmail, drive, and docs facilities (Alverson et al., 2019). The facility helps
teachers create and collect paperless tasks, including time-saving features such as the ability to automatically create
Google Docs copies for each student (Alverson et al., 2019; Hooks & Casarez, 2018).
3.1.3 See Phase
During the lecture process, it was seen that most groups of students actively discussed and practiced KKM analysis.
They were able to determine KI, KD, and indicators and determine KKM. There were only two students who still

Published by Sciedu Press 62 ISSN 1927-6044 E-ISSN 1927-6052

http://ijhe.sciedupress.com International Journal of Higher Education Vol. 9, No. 1; 2020

looked confused, but after being allowed to ask questions and give explanations, the two students were active again.
It turned out that these problematic students have a team member who was less able to work together in groups so
that for the next meeting the group will be brought up and noticed the homogeneity of the group members.
Cooperation was very clear, especially the number of members in a small group of 2-3 people so that each student
can work effectively. The model lecturer provides group guidance so that each group can do KKM calculations
correctly. Group learning can help students understand the subject matter more effectively because they can work
together in their respective groups (Liu, Li, & Zhang, 2018; Sharan, Sharan, & Tan, 2013).
3.2 Lesson 2
3.2.1 Plan Phase
At the second meeting, the material taught is about determining the effective week. During the Plan phase,
discussions were held with a team of Physics Education lecturers to improve learning devices. Lecturers prepare
presentation media, examples of effective week analysis, and effective week calculation worksheets using Microsoft
excel processing software.
3.2.2 Do Phase
At the beginning of the lecture, the model lecturer conveyed a general description of the material and provided
motivation and apperception about the material analyzing the Effective Week. Students were divided into eight
groups, each consisting of 2-3 heterogeneous people. Each group was given an example of an effective week analysis.
Figure 2 shows the learning atmosphere where students discuss examples of effective week analysis provided by the
lecturer.

Figure 2. Lecturers provide examples of effective week analysis to be discussed with the group
The lecturer asked several groups to appear and present the results of their group discussions and prioritized groups
that had never presented. Through this stage, students have understood how to analyze effective weeks. Then the
lecturer gave the task of analyzing the effective week to practice the knowledge they have acquired. Tasks that were
completed and developed by each student were collected the following week through each student's account on
Google Classroom.
3.2.3 See Phase
The enthusiasm of students in asking questions. Discussions conducted by students showed an excellent academic
atmosphere. Some students actively ask questions, and some students answer the questions. Model lecturer, as a
facilitator in learning, provides opportunities for each student to emulate the results they get. Discussions that take
place during learning were very useful because students can share their work and input from other students. Learning
facilitated by the lecturer should be able to facilitate and encourage students to be creative in learning (Suryani,
2017).
3.3 Lesson 3
3.3.1 Plan Phase
At the third meeting, the material taught was about annual program preparation. During the Plan phase, discussions
were held with a team of Physics Education lecturers to improve learning devices. Lecturers prepare a powerpoint
presentation media, examples of annual program analysis, and annual program creation worksheets.
3.3.2 Do Phase
At the beginning of the lecture, the model lecturer gave a general description of the material and provided motivation
and apperception about the material for the annual program preparation. Students were divided into eight groups,

Published by Sciedu Press 63 ISSN 1927-6044 E-ISSN 1927-6052

http://ijhe.ssciedupress.com
m Internationaal Journal of Higgher Education Vol. 99, No. 1; 2020

each conssisting of 2-3 heterogeneouus people. Eacch group was given exampples of annuall program tools. Then the
lecturer aasked several groups to preesent the resullts of the grouup discussion and prioritiziing groups thaat had never
presentedd. Figure 3 shoows the learninng atmospheree when one grooup explains thhe results of thhe group discuussion.

Figurre 3. The lecturrer asked seveeral groups to present the ressults of the disscussion
At the grooup presentatiion stage, studdents discuss how to makee an annual prrogram so thaat they can unnderstand the
material w
well. Then thee lecturer assiggned the task oof making an annual prograam to practicee the knowledgge they have
acquired. Tasks that weere carried outt and developeed by each stuudent were collected the folllowing week tthrough each
student's account
a on Gooogle Classrooom.
3.3.3 See Phase
At this m
meeting, studennts appeared eenthusiastic too attend the cllass. Students actively askeed questions reelated to the
material bbeing studied. In group disccussion activitties, they weree seen cooperrating in workking on assignnments given
by the moodel lecturers.
3.4 Lessonn 4
3.4.1 Plann Phase
At the fouurth meeting, the material ttaught was abbout the analyysis of the sem m. During the Plan phase,
mester program
discussionns were held wwith a team of
o Physics Eduucation lecturers to improvve learning devvices. Lectureers prepare a
powerpoinnt presentatioon media, sammple semester program anaalysis, and sem mester program
m calculationn worksheets
using an eexcel program
m.
3.4.2 Do Phase
P
At the beeginning of thhe lecture, thee model lectuurer delivered a general description of thhe material annd provided
motivation and apperceeption about the t material analyzing
a the semester proggram. Studentts were divideed into eight
groups, eaach consistingg of 2-3 heteroogeneous peopple. Each grouup was given eexamples of seemester progrram analysis.
Then the lecturer askeed several grooups to appearr and presentt the results oof the group ddiscussion andd prioritized
groups thaat had never ppresented. Thrrough this stagge, students alrready understand how to annalyze semesteer programs.
Then the lecturer gavee the task of analyzing
a the semester proogram to practice the know wledge they haad obtained.
Figure 4 sshows the colllaboration of students
s in working on the aanalysis tasks of
o the semesteer program.

Figure 4. The lectureer gave a semeester program aanalysis sheett to work with the group
Students w work togetherr in doing thee assignments.. Tasks that w
were completed and developped by each sstudent were
collected the following week throughh each student's account on G Google Classrroom. The lectturer can direcctly examine
all studennt assignmentss. Students caan immediately find out theeir grades. Figgure 5 shows the appearannce of online

Published by Sciedu Presss 64 ISSN 19277-6044 E-ISSSN 1927-6052

http://ijhe.ssciedupress.com
m Internationaal Journal of Higgher Education Vol. 99, No. 1; 2020

learning using
u Google C
Classroom.

Figure 5. Googlle Classroom aapplication dissplay

3.4.3 See Phase
At this meeting,
m all stuudents noticed the subject m
matter. Studentts who do not understand thhe lesson imm
mediately ask
questions. Students enjjoyed taking llessons. Learnning methods applied by leccturers are alsso appropriatee to improve
student-leearning outcomes. PjBL leearning requiires students to think crittically to com mplete the giiven project
assignmennt (Bell, 2010). Project taasks completeed by studentts have good results. Thiss is because tthe learning
activities continue to bee improved annd reflected thrrough lesson sstudy (Clea Feernandez, 20022).
At each m meeting, an asssessment of student
s learninng outcomes was based onn the given project assignm ment. Student
assignmennt assessmentt was carried out online thhrough the Gooogle Classrooom applicatioon. Students ccan find out
directly thhe results of thhe assessment by the lectureer. Assessmentt analysis of sttudent learningg outcomes caan be seen in
Figure 6.

F
Figure 6. Analyysis of studentt learning outccomes assessed at each meeting
Figure 6 sshows that theere was an incrrease in studennt learning ouutcomes in eacch assignment given at each meeting. At
the first m
meeting, the avverage score w
was 67.8 ± SD D 2.4 (good) w with the distribbution of studeent learning ooutcomes; all
of them w were in a goodd range. The reesults at meetiing 1 were nott much differeent from the seecond meetingg, which was
representeed by an averrage value of 668.6 ± SD 6.44 (good) with the distribution of student learning outccomes, all in
good cateegories. At thee third meetinng, there was aan increase in the average vvalue of 74.1 ± SD 3.4 (good) with the
distributioon of student learning outccomes, mostlyy at good inteervals but alsoo at very good intervals. A At the fourth
meeting also
a experienced an increasee that was obttained an averaage value of 75.0 7 ± SD 6.3 (good) with tthe spread of

Published by Sciedu Presss 65 ISSN 19277-6044 E-ISSSN 1927-6052

http://ijhe.sciedupress.com International Journal of Higher Education Vol. 9, No. 1; 2020

student assessment, most of them were within the very good category, and some were in a good category. Therefore,
it can be concluded that in general, PjBL assisted by E-Learning learning can improve student-learning outcomes.
PjBL involves various stages that can improve student-learning outcomes. Through project assignments, students can
involve all mental and physical, including social skills, by doing many things (Lee, Huh, & Reigeluth, 2015;
Widyaningsih & Yusuf, 2019). PjBL was a learning approach that takes into account the mastery of concepts.
Students explore, assess, interpret and synthesize information through meaningful methods (Han, Capraro, &
Capraro, 2015). Through PjBL students in conducting group investigations, this will be able to enhance their
collaboration (Panasan, Nuangchalerm, & Muang, 2010; Splichal, Oshima, & Oshima, 2018).
At the end of the learning, students' responses to learning have been carried out. Students can provide assessment
responses online through the Google Classroom application. The results of the analysis of student responses through
the Ministep application were presented in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Student response after learning

Figure 7 shows that on the right two statements ware difficult for students to approve, namely S4 and S5. Each
statement regarding the lack of delivery of material by the lecturer and the non-submission of references used in
learning. Students find it difficult to approve the statement because they have been accustomed to learning directly
by lecturers. The lecturer delivers all subject matter so that students were not trained in their ability to find and find
their concepts. Through PjBL learning, students were required to study and complete their projects (Gülbahar &
Tinmaz, 2006). Through the help of Google Classroom, students can easily obtain information, discuss and collect
tasks directly (Al-Maroof & Al-Emran, 2018; Heggart et al., 2018). In Figure 6 the left-hand side shows that most
students agree to the statement given. This shows that the learning method raises a good response for students. PjBL
learning assisted by e-learning through lesson study activities encourages students' ability to be creative in
completing project assignments provided through the help of information and communication technology media. The
quality of learning can continue to be developed because through lesson study activities can reflect a variety of
shortcomings during learning to be further improved (Saito et al., 2006).

Published by Sciedu Press 66 ISSN 1927-6044 E-ISSN 1927-6052

http://ijhe.sciedupress.com International Journal of Higher Education Vol. 9, No. 1; 2020

4. Conclusion
Based on the results of the research obtained, it can be concluded that the quality of learning can be improved during
the implementation of PjBL learning assisted by e-learning through lesson study activities. Students were active
during learning activities, and they can complete project assignments. The results of the assessment of student
learning outcomes continue to increase. At the first meeting, the average score was 67.8 ± SD 2.4 (good). The second
meeting was the average value of 68.6 ± SD 6.4 (good). At the third meeting, there was an increase of 74.1 ± SD 3.4
(good). At the fourth meeting also experienced an increase of 75.0 ± SD 6.3 (good). Therefore, it can be concluded
that in general, the learning method can improve students’ learning outcomes. Assessment of student responses after
learning also shows a good response. It is expected that the implementation of learning like this can continue to be
done to improve the quality of learning.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Ristekdikti for the PKP-PBMRI (lesson study) grant that was given to the University of
Papua so that this activity could be carried out well. The author wishes to thank the Dean of FKIP and the Chair of
LPPM University of Papua for their help and support so that this activity can be carried out smoothly.
References
Al-Maroof, R. A. S., & Al-Emran, M. (2018). Students acceptance of google classroom: An exploratory study using
PLS-SEM approach. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(6), 112–123.
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i06.8275
Alverson, J., Schwartz, J., Libraries, S. S.-C. & R., & 2018, undefined. (2019). Authentic Assessment of Student
Learning in an Online Class: Implications for Embedded Practice. Crl.Acrl.Org. Retrieved from
http://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/16889
Barron, B. J. S., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). Doing
With Understanding: Lessons From Research on Problem- and Project-Based Learning. Journal of the
Learning Sciences, 7(3–4), 271–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.1998.9672056
Ba, G., & Beyhan, Ö. (2010). Effects of multiple intelligences supported project-based learning on students’
achievement levels and attitudes towards english lesson. International Electronic Journal of Elementary
Education, 2(3), 365–385.
Bell, S. (2010). Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future. The Clearing House: A Journal of
Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415
Cochrane, T., Redmond, P., & Corrin, L. (2018). Technology enhanced learning , research impact , and open
scholarship. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), i–viii.
Fernandez, C., & Yoshida, M. (2004). Lesson Study. New York: Routledge.
Fernandez, Clea. (2002). Learning from Japanese Approaches to Professional Development: The Case of Lesson
Study. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(5), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248702237394
Genc, M. (2015). The project-based learning approach in environmental education. International Research in
Geographical and Environmental Education, 24(2), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2014.993169
Gülbahar, Y., & Tinmaz, H. (2006). Implementing Project-Based Learning And E-Portfolio Assessment In an
Undergraduate Course. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(3), 309–327.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2006.10782462
Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2015). How Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (Stem)
Project-Based Learning (Pbl) Affects High, Middle, and Low Achievers Differently: the Impact of Student
Factors on Achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(5), 1089–1113.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9526-0
Heggart, K. R., Yoo, J., & Heggart, K. (2018). Getting the Most from Google Classroom: A Pedagogical Framework
for Tertiary Educators. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 140–153.
https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n3.9
Heo, H., Lim, K. Y., & Kim, Y. (2010). Exploratory study on the patterns of online interaction and knowledge
co-construction in project-based learning. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1383–1392.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.012

Published by Sciedu Press 67 ISSN 1927-6044 E-ISSN 1927-6052

http://ijhe.sciedupress.com International Journal of Higher Education Vol. 9, No. 1; 2020

Hooks, D., & Casarez, L. (2018). Using Universal Design in Learning for Google Classroom. In E. Langran & J.
Borup (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International
Conference 2018 (pp. 2181–2184). Washington, D.C., United States: Association for the Advancement of
Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/182826
Karyadi, Sinon, I. L. S., Yusuf, I., & Widyaningsih, S. W. (2018). Correlation Analysis between External Factors and
Students ’ Physics Learning Achievement. Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains, 7(1), 42–54.
Koh, J. H. L., Herring, S. C., & Hew, K. F. (2010). Project-based learning and student knowledge construction during
asynchronous online discussion. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 284–291.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.09.003
Kurniawan, R. B., Mujasam, M., Yusuf, I., & Widyaningsih, S. W. (2019). Development of physics learning media
based on Lectora Inspire Software on the elasticity and Hooke’s law material in senior high school. Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, 1157(032022), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/3/032022
Lee, D., Huh, Y., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2015). Collaboration, intragroup conflict, and social skills in project-based
learning. Instructional Science, 43(5), 561–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9348-7
Liu, X., Li, L., & Zhang, Z. (2018). Small group discussion as a key component in online assessment training for
enhanced student learning in web-based peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2),
207–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1324018
Panasan, M., Nuangchalerm, P., & Muang, A. (2010). Learning Outcomes of Project-Based and Inquiry-Based
Learning Activities Department of Curriculum and Instruction , Faculty of Education , Mahasarakham
University , Mahasarakham 44000 Thailand. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 252–255.
Riduwan. (2011). Skala Pengukuran Variabel-Variabel Penelitian. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Saito, E., Hendayana, S., Imansyah, H., Ibrohim, Isamu, K., & Hideharu, T. (2006). Development of school-based
in-service training under the Indonesian Mathematics and Science Teacher Education Project®. Improving
Schools, 9(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480206061999
Sarimanah, E. (2018). Developing ERIES Learning Model to Improve Students-Teacher Basic Teaching Skills
Through the Implementation of Lesson Study. International Journal of Multi Disipline Science (IJ-MDS), 1(1),
29–35.
Sharan, S., Sharan, Y., & Tan, G. C. I. (2013). The group investigation approach to cooperative learning. C.
Hmelo-Silver, C. Chinn, C., A. O’Donnell, C. Chan, C.(Eds.), International Handbook of Collaborative
Learning.
Skultety, L., Gonzalez, G., & Vargas, G. (2017). Using Technology to Support Teachers’ Lesson Adaptations during
Lesson Study. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 25(2), 185–213. Retrieved from
https://www.learntechlib.org/p/172139
Splichal, J. M., Oshima, J., & Oshima, R. (2018). Regulation of collaboration in project-based learning mediated by
CSCL scripting reflection. Computers & Education, 125, 132–145.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.003
Suryani, A. (2017). “ I am an Old Car, My Engine is not Powerful Anymore ‘ A Senior Teacher’s Voice on His ICT
Learning, Obstacles and Its’’’ Implications for Teachers’ Development.’” International Journal of Pedagogy
and Teacher Education (IJPTE), 1(2), 174–188. https://doi.org/10.20961/ijpte.v1i2.15000
Widyaningsih, S. W., & Yusuf, I. (2018). Project Based Learning Model Based on Simple Teaching Tools and
Critical Thinking Skills. Kasuari: Physics Education Journal (KPEJ), 1(1), 12–21.
Widyaningsih, S. W., & Yusuf, I. (2019). Influence of RMS model (reading, mind mapping, and sharing) on student
learning outcomes in school laboratory course. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(032024), 1–6.
Yusuf, I., & Subaer. (2013). Pengembangan perangkat pembelajaran fisika berbasis media laboratorium virtual pada
materi dualisme gelombang partikel di SMA Tut Wuri Handayani Makassar. Jurnal Pend. IPA Indonesia, 2(2),
189–194.
Yusuf, I., & Widyaningsih, S. W. (2019). HOTS profile of physics education students in STEM-based classes using
PhET media. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(032021), 1–5.

Published by Sciedu Press 68 ISSN 1927-6044 E-ISSN 1927-6052